In the wake of the replication crisis in the early 2010s, there has been a heightened emphasis on ensuring transparency and reproducibility in scientific literature, aiming to rebuild trust in the scientific process. This period saw numerous replication attempts, the formulation of best practices for research, and the establishment of various organizations dedicated to promoting responsible research (Nosek et al., 2016; Bosco et al., 2014; Aarts et al., 2015; Klein et al., 2014; Camerer et al., 2018). Collectively known as Open Science Practices, these efforts highlight transparent and collaborative approaches to scientific inquiry. Despite the launch of numerous initiatives to promote Open Science practices, there is limited evidence available regarding their current implementation within the research community. Some research fields have investigated and identified a previous lack of transparent and reproducible methods (Hardwicke et al., 2021; Hardwicke et al., 2020; Louderback et al., 2022). However, the current state of affairs in this regard remains unknown for false memory research within Legal Psychology, despite its significant practical implications (Lacy & Stark, 2013; Schacter & Loftus, 2013). Therefore, the current research aims to investigate the current state of affairs concerning the application of Open Science practices specifically within this field.